Ecological Attributes of Sacred Groves in West Khasi Hills, Meghalaya, India
1
College of Forestry,
Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture,
Technology and Sciences,
Prayagraj,
Uttar Pradesh
India
Corresponding author Email: Kerrywillsonmarbaniang66@gmail.com
Copy the following to cite this article:
Marbaniang K. W, Narzary D, Kumar H. Ecological Attributes of Sacred Groves in West Khasi Hills, Meghalaya, India. Curr World Environ 2024;19(3).
Copy the following to cite this URL:
Marbaniang K. W, Narzary D, Kumar H. Ecological Attributes of Sacred Groves in West Khasi Hills, Meghalaya, India. Curr World Environ 2024;19(3).
Citation Manager Publish History
Select type of program for download
Endnote EndNote format (Mac & Win) | |
Reference Manager Ris format (Win only) | |
Procite Ris format (Win only) | |
Medlars Format | |
RefWorks Format RefWorks format (Mac & Win) | |
BibTex Format BibTex format (Mac & Win) |
Article Publishing History
Received: | 2024-01-30 |
---|---|
Accepted: | 2024-10-23 |
Reviewed by: | Tapan Mishra |
Second Review by: | B S Adhikari |
Final Approval by: | Dr. Hemant Kumar |
Introduction
Sacred groves, remnants of ancient, untouched forests, hold immense ecological and cultural significance, particularly within indigenous societies.Meghalaya, nestled in the northeastern corner of India, is a bio-geographical crossroads where the paleo-arctic, Indo-Malayan, and Indo-Chinese realms converge. The state's diverse topography, characterized by significant variations in rainfall, temperature, altitude, and soil types, creates a mosaic of ecological niches that support a rich tapestry of tropical and subtropical vegetation. The remote and inaccessible humid areas of Meghalaya, in particular, serve as refugia for a diverse flora, providing a glimpse into the region's ancient botanical heritage. These sacred spaces, known locally as "Law Kyntang," "Law Lyngdoh," or "Law Niam," stand as testament to the harmonious coexistence between humans and nature. Preserved by local communities under the guidance of traditional beliefs and practices, these groves serve as sanctuaries for deities and ancestral spirits. This reverence has ensured their protection for generations, making them invaluable repositories of biodiversity and ecological knowledge.
Top of Form
Sacred groves, physically forested areas, are culturally linked to rituals, taboos, and hold significance in biodiversity, culture, and ethnic heritage. Nature worship, practiced by various traditional communities, emphasizes the protection of natural creations. These groves, found in Asia and Africa, have historical roots dating back thousands of years, often associated with pre-agricultural societies1. Traditional approaches to nature conservation involve beliefs that include prescriptions and proscriptions, such as forbidding the removal of even small twigs from sacred groves. These groves benefit society, serving as indicators of potential natural vegetation2. Despite going by different names, such as Law shnong or Law Adong, in the Khasi Hills district, these groves share the same status and are used for various rituals and religious events3. Sacred groves are vital for conservation, housing indigenous and vulnerable flora, maintaining local micro-environmental conditions, controlling soil erosion, and contributing to biogeochemical cycles4. However, human activities pose a threat to these groves, with degradation caused by the erosion of traditional beliefs and practices. The shift from traditional worship to Christianity has led to the loss of faith in sacred groves, contributing to their disappearance5. The degradation of primary forests due to various human activities further exacerbates the threat to these sacred areas.
In response to these challenges, an extensive survey was conducted to study the phytosociology of three Sacred Groves in the West Khasi Hills District, aiming to understand their ecological importance and address conservation concerns.
Materials and Methods
The study, conducted during 2020-21 in selected sacred groves in the state of Meghalaya, focused on exploring the ecological attributes of three sacred groves in the West Khasi Hills region. Various diversity indices, including Important Value Index (IVI), Species diversity, Dominance, and Evenness, were analysed for both trees and shrubs.
Study Site
The research was conducted within three sacred groves located in the West Khasi Hills district of Meghalaya: Law Lyngdoh Mawnai (Site 1), Law Lyngdoh Nonglait (Site 2), and Law Lyngdoh Mawlong (Site 3). The geographical locations of these three sites in the heart of Meghalaya’s West Khasi Hills are shown in Fig 1.
Figure 1: Map illustrating study site
|
Figure 2: Law Lyngdoh Mawnai sacred groves (source: Google Earth)
|
Figure 3: Law Lyngdoh Nonglait sacred groves (source: Google Earth)
|
Figure 4: Aerial view of Law Lyngdoh Mawlong sacred groves (source: Google Earth).
|
Law Lyngdoh Mawnai, located in Mawnai village within Hima Nongkhlaw's Syiemship, spans 23.7 hectares and is positioned at 25° 34' 48" N latitude and 91° 35' 44" E longitude (Fig. 2). Law Lyngdoh Nonglait, located in Nonglait village within Hima Mawiang Syiemship, spans approximately 50 hectares and is located at Latitude 25° 29' 12" N and Longitude 91° 30’ 23" E. (Fig.3). Law Lyngdoh Mawlong, located in Mawlong village within Hima Nongkhlaw's Syiemship, covers around 200 hectares and is located at Latitude 25° 32' 29" N and Longitude 91° 38' 40" E. (Fig. 4)
Climate and Soil
The district experiences a varied climate, ranging from mildly tropical to temperate and sub-tropical in different areas. Influenced by the southwest monsoon, it guarantees summer rainfall, averaging 1200mm to 3000mm annually. The district's diverse topography results in various soil types, with red gravelly and red loamy soils being common. These soils are acidic, with high organic matter and nitrogen but low phosphorus levels. Areas with recurrent fires show minimal soil development, often leaving bare rock surfaces. Poor soil overlays the rocks, serving as the rooting medium for pine vegetation.
Sampling Method
A botanical survey was conducted to record and categorize plant species at the study site based on their habits, identifying each species of trees and shrubs. The survey employed a total of 120 quadrats, divided equally among the three sites. For each site, 40 quadrats were sampled: 20 quadrats measuring 10 meters by 10 meters and another 20 quadrats measuring 5 meters by 5 meters. Within each site, 20 quadrats were specifically designated for studying trees, while the remaining 20 were used for examining shrubs. The quadrats were placed at intervals of 200 meters from one another. The local names of the species were determined using various sources, including forest staff, experience guide and villagers from the local area. A file of specimens was prepared for identification, referring to the Herbarium, and the species were identified by using pictures and local name and cross reference it with research paper, journals and books.
Data Analysis
The following equations were used in the assessment process:
Important Value Index (IVI)= Relative Frequency + Relative Density + Relative Dominance
Species Richness (Margalef’s index of richness)6
Where,
S=Total no. of species
N=Total no. of individual
Species Diversity6
Where,
Pi= n/N (proportion of each species in the sample)
n= Number of individual species
N= Total number of individuals
Evenness Index 6
Where,
H'= Shannon’s index value,
S = Total no. of species.
Log = Bits per individual
Index of dominance 6
Where,
D=Simpson index of dominance
n= Number of individual species
N= Total number of individuals
Similarity index 7
Where,
a= represent the total number of species present in both first and second sample
b= represent the total number of species present in first sample only
c= represent the total number of species present in second sample only
Results
Distinct trends in composition, distribution, and species richness are shown by comparing the diversity of tree species in the three sacred groves as shown in Table 1. Between the three sites, 42 different tree species belonging to 25 different groups were found. Site 1 home 331 individuals representing 23 species from 18 families. Site 2 had 305 individuals spanning 17 species from 13 families. Site 3 included 287 individuals across 22 species from 13 families. Common species across all sites include Castanopsis tribuloides, Ilex venulosa, Magnolia oblonga, Magnolia champaca, Myrica esculenta, Prunus nepalensis and Schima wallichii.
Table 1: Composition and distribution of Trees in Law Lyngdoh Mawnai (Site1), Law Lyngdoh Nonglait (Site2) and Law Lyngdoh Mawlong (Site3)
Botanical name | Family Name | Local Name | Site 1 | site 2 | site 3 |
Aralia armata (Wall.) Seem. | Araliaceae | Diengtympu | - | 2 | 3 |
Beilschmiedia brandisii (Meisn.) Kosterm. | Lauraceae | Sohkhyllam | - | - | 1 |
Betulaceae | Dienglieng | 1 | - | - | |
Cascaria glomerata Roxb | Flacourtiaceae | Diengshiahdohkha | 15 | - | - |
Fagaceae | Sohot | 34 | 126 | 85 | |
Ulmaceae | Diengshini | 12 | - | - | |
Chukrasia velutina M.Roem. | Meliaceae | Diengpoma | - | 5 | - |
Cinnamomum bijolghota (Buch.-Ham.) Sweet. | Lauraceae | Diengtyrdop | 1 | - | - |
Cinnamomum cecicodaphne Meisn. | Lauraceae | Diengpingwait | - | 14 | 8 |
Cinnamomum tamala (Buch.-Ham.) T.Nees & Eberm. | Lauraceae | Dienglatyrpad | - | 5 | - |
Cinnamomum verum J.Presl. | Lauraceae | Diengseisia | - | - | 2 |
Citrus latipes (Swingle) Tanaka. | Rutaceae | Sohkynphor | 64 | - | 6 |
Derris elliptica (Wall.) Benth. | Fabaceae | Sohphyllad | 1 | - | - |
Docynia indica (Wall.) Decne. | Rosaceae | Sohphoh | 7 | - | - |
Engelhardia spicata Lesch. ex Blume | Juglandaceae | Dienglyba | 3 | - | - |
Eurya acuminata DC. | Theaceae | Dieng shit | - | - | 4 |
Exbucklandia populnea (R.Br. ex Griff.) R. W. Br. | Hamamelidaceae | Diengdoh | - | 6 | - |
Ficus elastica Roxb. ex Hornem. | Moraceae | Diengjri | 3 | - | - |
Ficus sp. | Moraceae | Dieng dud | - | - | 2 |
Fraxinus ornus L. | Oleaceae | - | 18 | - | - |
Glochidion sphaerogynum Kurz. | Euphorbiaceae | Diengthiang um | - | 9 | - |
Ilex venulosa Hance. | Aquifoliaceae | Diengshyieng | 21 | 34 | 42 |
Lithocarpus dealbatus (Hook.f. & Thomson ex Miq.) Rehder. | Fagaceae | Diengsai | - | - | 7 |
Magnolia oblonga (Wall. ex Hook.f. & Thomson) Figlar | Magnoliaceae | Diengniar | 12 | 22 | 13 |
Magnolia champaca (L) Baill. Ex Pierre | Magnoliaceae | Diengrai | 24 | 36 | 10 |
Murraya koenigii (L.) Spreng. | Rutaceae | Diengpnor | - | - | 8 |
Myrica esculenta Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don | Myricaceae | Diengsohphie | 18 | 3 | 58 |
Myrica nagi | Myricaceae | Sohphielurdi | 12 | - | - |
Pinus kesiya Royle ex Gordon. | Pinaceae | Diengkseh | 31 | - | - |
Pourthiaea arbutifolia (Lindl.) Decne. | Rosaceae | Sohryngkham | - | - | 2 |
Prunus nepalensis (Ser.) Steud. | Rosaceae | Sohiong | 7 | 4 | 1 |
Pterocarya stenoptera C.DC. | Juglandaceae | Diengkynjri | 2 | - | 1 |
Pyrus pashia Buch. Ham. ex D.Don. | Rosaceae | Diengsohjhur | - | - | 2 |
Quercus glauca Thunb. | Fagaceae | Chanamdngiem | - | 13 | 15 |
Quercus serrata Murray. | Fagaceae | Diengrtiang | - | 10 | - |
Rhododendron arboreum Sm.. | Ericaceae | Tiewsaw | 6 | - | - |
Rhus succedanea L. | Anacardiaceae | Diengkain | - | 4 | - |
Schefflera digitata J.R.Forst. & G.Forst. | Araliaceae | Diengsansla | 26 | - | - |
Schima wallichii (DC.) Korth. | Theaceae | Diengngan | 8 | 8 | 14 |
Symplocos chinensis (Lour.) Druce. | Symplocaceae | Diengiong | - | - | 2 |
Symplocos khasiana C.B.Clarke. | Symplocaceae | Diengpei | - | 4 | - |
Syzygium jambos (L.) Alston. | Myrtaceae | Diengjam | 5 | - | 1 |
Total | 331 | 305 | 287 |
The most important tree species in Site 1, as measured by the Importance Value Index (IVI), is revealed in Table 2 with Ficus elastica (41.1), Citrus latipes (30.9), and Castanopsis tribuloides (26.1) having the highest IVI. In site 2 Castanopsis tribuloides (64.4) represent the highest IVI, followed by Magnolia champaca (43.3), and Ilex venulosa (28.4) while In site 3 Castanopsis tribuloides (50.6) showed the highest IVI followed by Myrica esculenta (40.4), and Ilex venulosa (30.3). In site 1 the most abundant families is Fagaceae followed by Juglandaceae, Magnoliaceae, and Myricaceae, in site 2 it is dominated by Fagaceae, followed by Lauraceae, Magnoliaceae, Anacardiaceae, Aquifoliaceae, and Araliaceae while in site 3 features Fagaceae, Rosaceae, Lauraceae, and Rutaceae as prominent families. From IVI values, the most dominant tree species site 1 are Ficu elastica Citrus latipes and Castanopsis tribuloides. In Law Lyngdoh Nonglait Castanopsis tribuloides dominated, followed by Magnolia champaca and Ilex venulosa and in site 3 showcases Myrica esculenta as the most dominant, followed by Castanopsis tribuloides and Ilex venulosa.
Table 2: Quantitative analysis of tree in Law Lyngdoh Mawnai, Law Lyngdoh Nonglait and Law Lyngdoh Mawlong
Species | Law Lyngdoh Mawnai | Law Lyngdoh Nonglait | Law Lyngdoh Mawlong | ||||||
Density (Trees ha-1) | Total Basal Area (m2 ha-1) | IVI | Density (Trees ha-1) | Total Basal Area (m2 ha-1) | IVI | Density (Trees ha-1) | Total Basal Area (m2 ha-1) | IVI | |
Aralia armata | - | - | - | 0.1 | 0.24 | 3.7 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 4 |
Beilschmiedia brandisii | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1 | 1.2 | 7.8 |
Betula alnoides | 0.1 | 2.01 | 5.3 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Casearia glomerata | 0.8 | 0.68 | 8.4 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Castanopsis tribuloides | 1.7 | 1.79 | 26.1 | 6.3 | 1.06 | 64 | 4.3 | 1.2 | 50.6 |
Celtis tetrandra Roxb. | 0.6 | 4.42 | 14.5 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Chukrasia velutina | - | - | - | 0.25 | 0.4 | 6.4 | - | - | - |
Cinnamomum bejolghota | 0.1 | 2.54 | 6.4 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Cinnamomum glanduliferum | - | - | - | 0.7 | 2.24 | 23 | 0.4 | 1.6 | 17.5 |
Cinnamomum tamala | - | - | - | 0.25 | 0.59 | 7.6 | - | - | - |
Cinnamomum verum | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1 | 0.1 | 2.1 |
Citrus latipes | 3.2 | 0.52 | 30.9 | - | - | - | 0.3 | 0.4 | 7.5 |
Derris elliptica | 0.1 | 0.52 | 2.2 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Docynia indica | 0.4 | 0.97 | 5.8 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Engelhardtia spicata | 0.2 | 1.23 | 5.9 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Eurya acuminata | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.2 | 0.4 | 6.3 |
Exbucklandia populnea | - | - | - | 0.3 | 1.17 | 10 | - | - | - |
Ficus elastic | 0.2 | 18.46 | 41.1 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Ficus sp. | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1 | 0.9 | 7.5 |
Fraxinus ornus | 0.9 | 0.18 | 11.5 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Glochidion sphaerogynum | - | - | - | 0.45 | 0.8 | 11 | - | - | - |
Ilex venulosa | 1.1 | 1.01 | 14.1 | 1.7 | 0.63 | 28 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 30.3 |
Lithocarpus dealbatus | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.4 | 0.9 | 11.9 |
Magnolia champaca | 1.2 | 3.13 | 25.1 | 1.8 | 3.16 | 43 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 16.9 |
Magnolia oblonga | 0.6 | 1.03 | 10.6 | 1.1 | 1.44 | 28 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 13.1 |
Murraya koenigii | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.4 | 0.3 | 7.1 |
Myrica esculenta | 0.9 | 0.84 | 12.8 | 0.15 | 1.51 | 11 | 2.9 | 0.8 | 40.4 |
Myrica nagi | 0.6 | 0.63 | 10.6 | - | - | - | - | -- | - |
Pinus kesiya | 1.6 | 0.62 | 14.7 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Pourthiaea arquta | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1 | 0.1 | 2.8 |
Prunus nepalensis | 0.4 | 0.86 | 8.7 | 0.2 | 0.71 | 7.9 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 4 |
Pterocarya stenoptera | 0.1 | 1.47 | 5.3 | - | - | - | 0.1 | 2.8 | 17.2 |
Pyrus pashia | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1 | 0.3 | 4.2 |
Quercus kamroopii | - | - | - | 0.65 | 0.5 | 12 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 13.8 |
Quercus serrata | - | - | - | 0.5 | 0.27 | 9.9 | - | - | - |
Rhododendron arboretum | 0.3 | 0.28 | 4.8 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Rhus succedanea | - | - | - | 0.2 | 0.41 | 6.2 | - | - | - |
Schefflera elata | 1.3 | 0.99 | 17.2 | - | - | - | - | - | |
Schima wallichii | 0.4 | 1.09 | 9.5 | 0.4 | 2.21 | 20 | 0.7 | 2.1 | 22.7 |
Symplocos chinensis | - | -- | - | - | - | 0.1 | 1.1 | 8.6 | |
Symplocos khasiana | - | - | - | 0.2 | 0.4 | 6.1 | - | - | - |
Syzygium jambos | 0.3 | 2.63 | 8.6 | - | - | - | 0.1 | 0.4 | 3.7 |
The composition and distribution of shrub species diversity across the three sacred groves provides a comprehensive overview of their composition and distribution shown in Table 3. A total of 21 shrub species were found across three sites, belonging to 14 different families. Site 3 exhibited the most diverse shrub community with 19 species, while Site 2 had 17 species and Site 1 had 15 species. Site 1 had 725 shrub individuals across 13 families, Site 2 had 1307 individuals from 14 families, and Site 3 had 1039 individuals also from 13 families. Common species found across all sites include Ardisia crispa, Boehmeria nivea, Sarcandra glabra, Inula cappa, Lindera agregata, Melastoma malabathricum, Polygonum molle, Smilax ovalifolia, Solanum xanthocarpum, Urena lobata, Viburnum corylifolium and Viburnum foetidum, indicating a consistent presence of these species across diverse ecological niches. Dominant families across these sites include Rosaceae, Ericaceae, and Adoxaceae, highlighting the rich biodiversity within each grove and underscoring the importance of tailored conservation strategies to preserve these unique ecosystems.
Table 3: Composition and distribution of shrubs in Law Lyngdoh Mawnai, Law Lyngdoh Nonglait and Law Lyngdoh Mawlong.
Botanical Name | Family Name | Local Name | Site 1 | Site 2 | Site 3 |
Agapetes variegata (Roxb.) D.Don ex G.Don | Ericacea | Sohlamut | 37 | - | - |
Ageratina adenophora (Spreng.) R.M.King & H.Rob. | Ericacea | Bat iong/Bat Garmany | - | 44 | 114 |
Ardisia crispa (Thunb.) A.DC. | Primulaceae | Sohnewyear | 18 | 53 | 7 |
Boehmeria nivea (L.) Gaudich. | Urticaceae | Slanai | 41 | 81 | 103 |
Chloranthus brachystachys Blume | Chloranthaceae | Sohkrismas | 22 | 107 | 8 |
Inula cappa (Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don) DC. | Asteraceae | Jalangngap | 103 | 151 | 172 |
Lantana camara L. | Verbenas | Sohpangkhlieh | - | 59 | 60 |
Lindera aggregata (Sims) Kosterm. | Lauraceae | sohmritthok | 85 | 91 | 63 |
Melastoma malabathricum L. | Melastome | Jakhra | 96 | 132 | 49 |
Neillia thyrsiflora D.Don | Rosaceae | Syntiewlieh | 20 | - | - |
Polygonum orientale L. | Polygonaceae | Jalangnoh | 66 | 65 | 29 |
Rhododendron fortunei Lindl. | Ericacea | Tiewlieh | - | - | 28 |
Rubus ellipticus Sm. | Rosaceae | sohjemryngdang | - | 87 | 36 |
Rubus indicus Thunb. | Rosaceae | Sohshiah | - | 79 | 38 |
Rubus moluccanus L. | Rosaceae | slanepbah | 11 | - | 26 |
Rubus niveus Thunb. | Rosaceae | Diengsohkhawiong | - | 37 | 8 |
Smilax glyciphylla Sm. | Smilacaceae | Sohkrot | 79 | 120 | 69 |
Solanum xanthocarpum Schrad. & H.Wendl. | Solanaceae | Sohpdok | 20 | 27 | 34 |
Urena lobata L. | Malvaceae | Sohbyrthit | 74 | 108 | 94 |
Viburnum carlesii Hemsl. | Adoxaceae | Sohlangksew | 15 | 25 | 48 |
Viburnum foetidum Wall. | Adoxaceae | Sohlang | 38 | 41 | 53 |
Total | 725 | 1307 | 1039 |
The Importance Value Index (IVI) for each shrub species in the three sacred groves is detailed in Table 4. In Site 1, Viburnum foetidum (7.6), Viburnum corylifolium (7.5), and Inula cappa (7.3) were the most dominant shrubs, while Sarcandra glabra (2.4), Ardisia crispa (2.5), and Rubus moluccanus (3.6) were the least abundant. In Site 2, Smilax ovalifolia (26.3), Inula cappa (26.1), and Sarcandra glabra (23.3) exhibited the highest IVI, while Rubus niveus (9.3) and Solanum xanthocarpum (10.4) had the lowest IVI. In Site 3, Inula cappa (36.1) was the most dominant shrub, followed by Ageratina adenophora (24.5), and Urena lobata (21.8). Rubus niveus (6.8) and Rubus moluccanus (6.9) were the least abundant shrubs in this site. The dominant shrub families in Site 1 were Adoxaceae and Rosaceae, while Rosaceae was the most prominent family in Site 2 and Site 3. In conclusion, Boehmeria nivea, Inula cappa, Viburnum foetidum, and Smilax ovalifolia were the most dominant shrub species across the three sacred groves, with varying degrees of dominance in each site.
Table 4: Quantitative analysis of shrubs in Law Lyngdoh Mawnai, Law Lyngdoh Nonglait and Law Lyngdoh Mawlong
Species | Law Lyngdoh Mawnai | Law Lyngdoh Nonglait | Law Lyngdoh Mawlong | ||||||
Density (Trees ha-1) | Total Basal Area (m2 ha-1) | IVI | Density (Trees ha-1) | Total Basal Area (m2 ha-1) | IVI | Density (Trees ha-1) | Total Basal Area (m2 ha-1) | IVI | |
Agapetes variegata | 1.85 | 0.000343 | 18.28 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Ageratina adenophora | - | - | - | 2.2 | 0.000459 | 15.82 | 0.35 | 0.000638 | 9.64 |
Ardisia crispa | 0.9 | 0.000363 | 13.61 | 2.65 | 0.000192 | 13.53 | 5.15 | 0.000331 | 21.16 |
Boehmeria nivea | 2.05 | 0.001066 | 26.86 | 4.05 | 0.000235 | 16.41 | 0.4 | 0.000485 | 7.94 |
Chloranthum brachystachys | - | - | - | - | - | - | 8.6 | 0.000529 | 36.02 |
Inula cappa | 5.15 | 0.000598 | 34.48 | 7.55 | 0.000352 | 26.07 | 3 | 0.000562 | 16.79 |
Lantana camara | - | - | - | 2.95 | 0.000349 | 14.33 | 3.15 | 0.000427 | 18.45 |
Lindera aggregata | 4.25 | 0.000178 | 25.5 | 4.55 | 0.000241 | 18.03 | 2.45 | 0.000511 | 16.62 |
Melastoma malabathricum | 4.8 | 0.000406 | 29.75 | 6.6 | 0.00032 | 23.31 | 1.45 | 0.000118 | 7.12 |
Neilia thyrsiflora | 1 | 0.000328 | 10.99 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Polygonum molle | 3.3 | 0.000398 | 22.34 | 3.25 | 0.000333 | 15.3 | 1.65 | 0.000691 | 16.47 |
Rhododendron fortunei | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1.8 | 0.0006 | 13.46 |
Rubus ellipticus | - | - | - | 4.35 | 0.000341 | 17.88 | 1.9 | 0.000409 | 12.89 |
Rubus indicus | - | - | - | 3.95 | 0.000279 | 18.55 | 1.3 | 0.000126 | 6.94 |
Rubus moluccanus | 0.55 | 0.00021 | 7.12 | - | - | - | 0.4 | 0.00022 | 6.79 |
Rubus niveus | 1.85 | 0.000241 | 9.27 | 3.45 | 0.000544 | 18.92 | |||
Sarcandra glabra | 1.1 | 0.00043 | 16.76 | 5.35 | 0.00039 | 23.34 | |||
Smilax ovalifolia | 3.95 | 0.000352 | 28.94 | 6 | 0.000323 | 26.3 | 1.7 | 0.000507 | 12.91 |
Solanum xanthocarpum | 1 | 0.000201 | 9.02 | 1.35 | 0.000306 | 10.38 | 4.7 | 0.000458 | 21.79 |
Urena lobata | 3.7 | 0.000334 | 24.04 | 5.4 | 0.000224 | 18.27 | 2.4 | 0.000237 | 11.09 |
Viburnum carlilifolium | 0.75 | 0.000573 | 12.5 | 1.25 | 0.000446 | 11.83 | 2.65 | 0.000811 | 20.52 |
Viburnum foetidum | 1.9 | 0.000688 | 19.82 | 2.05 | 0.000845 | 21.39 | 2.65 | 0.000811 | 20.52 |
Table 5: Phyto-sociological attributes and diversity indices for trees species in the three Sites
Diversity Attributes | Site-1 | Site-2 | Site-3 |
The sum of plant species (S) | 23 | 17 | 22 |
Total number of individuals (N) | 331 | 305 | 287 |
Species richness (Margalefs index, 1988) Dmg=(S-1)/Ln N | 3.79 | 2.80 | 3.71 |
Species diversity (Shannon & weiner, 1963) (H')=-E(pi)[ln(pi)] | 2.71 | 2.10 | 2.3 |
Eveness index (Pielou, 1975) E=H'/ln S | 0.87 | 0.74 | 0.73 |
Dominance index (Simpson (1949) D=E(n/N)2 | 0.09 | 0.21 | 0.16 |
Similarity index (Sorensen, 1948) | Site 1-2 | Site 1-3 | Site 2-3 |
21.21 | 28.57 | 34.48 |
Table 6: Phytosociological attributes and diversity indices for shrubs species in all site.
Diversity Attributes | Site-1 | Site-2 | Site-3 |
The sum of plant species (S) | 15 | 17 | 19 |
Total number of individuals (N) | 725 | 1307 | 1044 |
Species richness (Margalefs index, 1988) | 2.12 | 2.22 | 2.58 |
Species diversity (Shannon & weiner, | 2.50 | 2.72 | 2.69 |
Eveness index (Pielou, 1975) | 0.92 | 0.96 | 0.91 |
Dominance index (Simpson (1949) D = E(n/N)2 | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.081 |
Similarity index ( Sorensen, 1948) S | Site 1-2 | Site 1-3 | Site 2-3 |
60 | 61.9 | 89.5 |
Discussion
The study conducted in the sacred groves of Law Lyngdoh Mawnai, Law Lyngdoh Nonglait, and Law Lyngdoh Mawlong in the West Khasi Hills District reveals substantial biodiversity, indicative of their ecological significance. The pattern of species richness observed, with site 3 exhibiting the highest richness, followed by site 2 and site 1, may be influenced by mild disturbances such as the selective felling of mature trees. These disturbances can enhance habitat heterogeneity and promote higher biodiversity.The distribution and dominance of tree species varied across the sites, with Ficus elastic Roxb, Citrus latipes, and Castanopsis tribuloides being most dominant in site 1; Castanopsis tribuloides, Magnolia champaca, and Ilex venulosa in site 2; and Myrica esculenta, Castanopsis tribuloides, and Ilex venulosa in site 3. The presence of dominant families such as Fagaceae, Lauraceae, and Rosaceae further highlights the ecological uniqueness of each site.In the pristine landscapes of Law Lyngdoh Mawlong, the rare and exquisite orchid commonly called as Creeping Lady's-tresses or Dwarf Rattlesnake (Goodyera sp.), has been documented. This discovery highlights the region's rich botanical diversity and the ecological significance of preserving such habitats.
Comparative analysis with other studies on sacred groves in Meghalaya underscores both similarities and distinctions. For example, the sacred groves in the Jaintia Hills have similar levels of species richness and diversity compared to those in the West Khasi Hills 8, emphasizing their ecological importance and conservation value. Additionally, the Diversity index (H’) values for the studied groves, which ranged from 2.10 to 2.71 for trees and 2.5 to 2.72 for shrubs, are consistent with those found in tropical forests 9. Moreover, these values surpass those reported for Namdapha National Park 10.
The evenness indices (0.87, 0.74, and 0.73 for trees, and 0.92, 0.96, 0.91 for shrubs across the three sites) indicate a relatively balanced distribution of species 11. The similarity indices suggest distinctive floristic compositions among the tree species (below 50%), while shrub species compositions were more similar across the sites (above 50%). Our findings support the existing literature on Meghalayan sacred groves, demonstrating comparable trends in species distribution and diversity 5.
The findings of this study are in line with those of other Himalayan regions, where comparable Shannon Wiener diversity values have been recorded and found comparable diversity values in the sacred groves of the Indian Himalayas, indicating that the protected status of these areas plays a crucial role in maintaining their biodiversity12. The higher diversity values in our study is similar when compared to those in the Garhwal Himalaya and this may be due to the long-term protection and the diverse geographical features of the sacred groves, which include variations in altitude, aspect, and fertile soils13. This study found that the majority of species in this study exhibited a clumped or contagious distribution pattern. It was found that approximately 85% of the total plant species were clumped, while 10% were randomly distributed and only 5% exhibited a regular distribution pattern. This observation aligns with the finding which noted that most plant species in natural forests display a clumped distribution pattern14. Clumped distribution is commonly observed in natural forests, whereas random distribution is typically found in uniform environments where individuals are scattered without a discernible pattern. In contrast, regular distribution suggests high competition among species 15.
Overall the sacred groves in the West Khasi Hills District are characterized by a high level of biodiversity and ecological importance, providing habitat for numerous endemic and rare plant species.These findings underscore the importance of preserving these groves, not only for their cultural and spiritual significance but also for their role in maintaining ecological balance and diversity.Top of Form
Conclusion
The observed variations in diversity indices among the sites underscore the distinct ecological conditions maintained by each grove. Particularly noteworthy is the role of sacred groves as sanctuaries for endemic and rare plant species, emphasizing the imperative for their conservation. The highest Shannon's diversity index in site 3, alongside fluctuations in species richness, evenness, dominance, and similarity indices, elucidates the nuanced ecological dynamics within each grove, accentuating the need for tailored conservation strategies that account for their unique attributes.The presence of Lantana camara L.poses a significant ecological threat due to its invasive nature. To mitigate its impact and restore ecological balance, a multifaceted approach combining prevention, control, and eradication strategies is imperative.
In a broader context, this research significantly contributes to the understanding of sacred groves as pivotal repositories of biodiversity. The findings underscore the urgency for sustained efforts in their preservation and sustainable management. The ecological insights derived from this study are poised to inform future conservation initiatives, providing a roadmap for ensuring the enduring vitality of these sacred ecosystems and the myriad life forms they nurture. This research thus serves as a valuable foundation for advancing our comprehension of sacred groves and advocating for their continued protection in the face of environmental challenges.
Acknowledgement
The authors are thankful to the President and secretary of Law Lyngdoh Mawnai clan, Law Lyngdoh Nonglait clan and Law Lyngdoh Mawlong clan and also College of forestry (SHUATS) who have provided much needed permission so that the research and work can be perform without any hindering and completed my research. The authors are thankful to anonymous reviewers whose contribution helps in improving the quality of manuscripts.
Funding Sources
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of Interest
The author(s) do not have any conflict of interest
Ethic Statement
This research did not involve human participants, animal subjects, or any material that requires ethical approval.
Informed Consent Statement
This study did not involve human participants, and therefore, informed consent was not required.
Author Contributions
Kerry Willson Marbaniang: Field Survey and collection of data, Collection of plants Specimens for herbarium preparation, Identification, data analysis, preparation of research paper.
Dippu Narzary: Data analysis, preparation of research paper, contributed to data interpretation, reviewed and revised the manuscript.
Hemant Kumar: Supervised the study,contributed to data interpretation, reviewed and revised the manuscript, provided guidance.
References
- Gadgil, M., and Vartak, V. D. (1975). Sacred groves of india; a plea for continued conservation, journal of Bombay natural history society 72: 314-320.
- Schaaf, T. 1998. Sacred groves in Ghana: Experiences from an integrated study project. Pages 145-150, In: Ramakrishnan, P.S., Saxena, K.G. and Chandrashekara, U.M. (Editors) Conserving the Sacred for Biodiversity Management. UNESCO and Oxford-IBH Publishing, New Delhi.
- Tiwari BK, Tynsong H, Lynrah MM, Lapasam E, Deb S and Sharma D. (2013). Institutional arrangement and typology of community forests of Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland of North-East India. Journal of Forestry Research 24(1): 179?186.
CrossRef - Upadhaya, K., Pande, H.N., LAW, P.S. and Tripathi, R.S. (2003) Tree diversity in sacred groves of the Jaintia hills in Meghalaya, Northeast India. Biodiversity and Conservation, (12): 583–597.
CrossRef - Tiwari BK, Barik SK, Tripathi RS. Sacred groves of Meghalaya. BiolConserv. 1999;98(2): 185194.
- Williams, M. S., & Khare, N. (2023). Study of plant diversity in Red Sanders Park in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh, India. International Journal of Plant & Soil Science, 35(19), 37-64.
CrossRef - Sørensen T. 1948. A method of establishing groups of amplitude in plant society based on similarity of species content. BiolSkr5: 1-34.
- Jamir SA, Pandey HN. Vascular plant diversity in the sacred groves of Jaintia Hills in northeast India. BiodiversConserv. 2003;12(7):1497-1510.
CrossRef - Devi, L.S. and Yadava, P.S. (2006). Floristic diversity assessment and vegetation analysis of tropical semi evergreen forest of Manipur, north east India, Tropical Ecology 47(1): 89- 98.
- Nath, P.C., Arunachalam A., Khan et al., (2005). Vegetation analysis and tree population structure of tropical wet evergreen forests in and around Namdapha National Park, northeast India, Biodiversity and Conservation, 14: 2109–2136.
CrossRef - Kent M, Coker, P. (1992). Vegetation description and analysis: a practical approach. Belhaven Press, London, 3.
- Sharma CM, Baduni NP, Gairola S, Ghildiyal SK, Suyal S. Tree diversity and carbon stocks of some major forest types of Garhwal Himalaya, India. For Ecol Manage. 2018;255(7):2087-2094.
- Pokhriyal, P., Naithani, V., Dasgupta, S., Todaria, N.P., (2009). Comparative studies on species, diversity and composition of Anogeissuslatifolius mixed forests in Phakot and PathriRao watersheds of garhwal Himalaya. Curr. Sci. 97 (9): 1349-1355.
- Das, Kumar, Anup., Singha, Bihari, Lal., and Khan, Latif, Mohammed. (2017). Community structure and species diversity of Pinus merkusii Jungh. & de Vriese forest along an altitudinal gradient in Eastern Himalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, India. International Journal of Tropical Ecology. 58(2): 397–408.
- Odum EP 1971. Fundamentals of ecology, 3rd, W.B Saunders Company, Philadelphia, P.A.